Should we use iris images for positive identification?

A new report by biometric researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) used data from thousands of frequent travelers enrolled in an iris recognition program to determine that no consistent change occurs in the distinguishing texture of their irises for at least a decade.

The new study counters a previous study of 217 subjects over a three-year period that found that recognition of the subjects’ irises became increasingly difficult, consistent with an aging effect.*

To learn more, NIST biometric researchers used several methods to evaluate iris stability.

Researchers first examined anonymous data from millions of transactions from NEXUS, a joint Canadian and American program used by frequent travelers to move quickly across the Canadian border.

As part of NEXUS, members’ irises are enrolled into the system with an iris camera and their irises are scanned and matched to system files when they travel across the border.

NIST researchers also examined a larger, but less well-controlled set of anonymous statistics collected over a six-year period.

Comments

I think there are a lot of issues yet to be solved before this should be used widely. 1) Privacy issues. 2) Recognition files, can these be hacked? 3) Health issues, can it be proven that years down the road this not going to be the cause vision problems?
Reply

Author: Guest

Posted: 2013-08-23

+7

Have there been any test cases before the courts to determine if a) this is even legal b) if the courts will accept them as positive proof, as in fingerprints and c) are there arguments attorneys can use to defeat this system of ID.
Reply

Author: Guest

Posted: 2013-08-23

+7

Should we use iris images for positive identification? I do not know, can you prove it is "Positive ID"?
Reply

Author: Guest

Posted: 2013-08-23

+7

The article says, recognition of the subjects’ irises became increasingly difficult, consistent with an aging effect. I do not see positive ID in this process.
Reply